Are we finally allowed to say 360 will never top KZ2 or U2.

[QUOTE="ronvalencia"]In the end, one must look at PS3 and Xbox 360 as a total system. What does the CryEngine3 beta benchmark tells you?AnnoyedDragon

You have made it quite clear what the beta benchmark says, but that doesn't make a stream processor something it is not.

If programmer is creative enough, there are tricks to reach the end goal. Notice both teams knows about NVIDIA NV40/G70 hardware issues and they are using SPEs extensively.

nah, not simple logic. honestly, you have no idea how the development process works. unless you've really worked in the industry, you've no experience. i call shenanigan's on your post.clone01

So you believe all hardware has unlimited performance; and 256mb ram can store many times its stated capacity? You think nothing can be questioned, regardless of how obvious it is, if you are not a developer?

Come on man, don't set yourself up as suggesting that.

If programmer is creative enough, there are tricks to reach the end goal. Notice both teams knows about NVIDIA NV40/G70 hardware issues and they are using SPEs extensively.ronvalencia

That doesn't change that a SPE is different from a PPE, being optimized for a different range of performance and tasks. Sure like you said a creative programmer can work around it to achieve the same result, but they are far too different to be able to say SPE = PPE performance.

resource distribution? thats all your argument is now? why do they have to distribute resources to one facet such as graphics OVER another resource such as AI when they can devote resources to both? that is unless you think the processor is maxed outi_am_interested

Does anyone else notice I am having to repeat myself to this guy over and over again? I've said it too many times already, go read the others.

[QUOTE="AnnoyedDragon"]

So you believe all hardware has unlimited performance; and 256mb ram can store many times its stated capacity? You think nothing can be questioned, regardless of how obvious it is, if you are not a developer?

Come on man, don't set yourself up as suggesting that.

[QUOTE="ronvalencia"]If programmer is creative enough, there are tricks to reach the end goal. Notice both teams knows about NVIDIA NV40/G70 hardware issues and they are using SPEs extensively.

That doesn't change that a SPE is different from a PPE, being optimized for a different range of performance and tasks. Sure like you said a creative programmer can work around it to achieve the same result, but they are far too different to be able to say SPE = PPE performance.

resource distribution? thats all your argument is now? why do they have to distribute resources to one facet such as graphics OVER another resource such as AI when they can devote resources to both? that is unless you think the processor is maxed outi_am_interested

Does anyone else notice I am having to repeat myself to this guy over and over again? I've said it too many times already, go read the others.

and im having to repeat myself 3 times

"My point was using Cell for graphics robs resources from other areas" - you said that, exactly that

to which you have NO proof of

how can the cell rob resources from other areas when it isnt even maxed out yet?

theres power there to improve both areas

[QUOTE="ronvalencia"]If programmer is creative enough, there are tricks to reach the end goal. Notice both teams knows about NVIDIA NV40/G70 hardware issues and they are using SPEs extensively.AnnoyedDragon

That doesn't change that a SPE is different from a PPE, being optimized for a different range of performance and tasks. Sure like you said a creative programmer can work around it to achieve the same result, but they are far too different to be able to say SPE = PPE performance.

I guessed 1 to 4 SPEs. With 4 SPEs, I kept in mind CELL's and Waternoose's lead creator's statements on Xbox 360 vs PS3.

From http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-metro2033-article?page=1

4A Games basically blasted (from last paragraph) Sony's NVIDIA GPU docs. Top tier NVIDIA "The Way It's Meant To Be Played" PC programmers has to count for something.Sony's GPU docs made NVIDIA DX9 GPUs looked bad.An example, Uncarted2's doesn'tpush G70/RSX's triangle count potential. Crytek already shown the way.

[QUOTE=""]

[QUOTE="AnnoyedDragon"]

That doesn't change that a SPE is different from a PPE, being optimized for a different range of performance and tasks. Sure like you said a creative programmer can work around it to achieve the same result, but they are far too different to be able to say SPE = PPE performance.

[QUOTE="i_am_interested"]resource distribution? thats all your argument is now? why do they have to distribute resources to one facet such as graphics OVER another resource such as AI when they can devote resources to both? that is unless you think the processor is maxed outi_am_interested

Does anyone else notice I am having to repeat myself to this guy over and over again? I've said it too many times already, go read the others.

and im having to repeat myself 3 times

"My point was using Cell for graphics robs resources from other areas" - you said that, exactly that

to which you have NO proof of

how can the cell rob resources from other areas when it isnt even maxed out yet?

theres power there to improve both areas

Define "maxed out". One can maxed out compute resources with simple math and infinite loop function. CELL's SPEs are like any other compute resource.New tricks can be discovered or applied, but hardware performance is still the same.

and im having to repeat myself 3 times

"My point was using Cell for graphics robs resources from other areas" - you said that, exactly that

to which you have NO proof of

how can the cell rob resources from other areas when it isnt even maxed out yet?

theres power there to improve both areas

i_am_interested

To answer that I would have to repeat myself again. Ok, last time.

"You will note those posts were talking about resource distribution. There wasn't a need to consider if Cell was maxed or not; because the same rules apply regardless."

Do you see that? Where I said that regardless of whether Cell is fully utilized or not; that my scenario would eventually be the case? Do you see how it was you and not me who brought the idea of it being maxed into argument? You're criticising me for something you said, all I said was my scenario applies either way.

Even if Cell isn't fully utilized, my scenario still applies with what performance they are able to tap from it. Regardless of the utilization; the resulting performance has to be distributed, the more graphics taking the less available for other tasks.

I guessed 1 to 4 SPEs. With 4 SPEs, I kept in mind CELL's and Waternoose's lead creator's statements on Xbox 360 vs PS3.

From http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-metro2033-article?page=1

4A Games basically blasted (from last paragraph) Sony's NVIDIA GPU docs. Top tier NVIDIA "The Way It's Meant To Be Played" PC programmers has to count for something.Sony's GPU docs made NVIDIA DX9 GPUs looked bad.An example, Uncarted2's doesn'tpush G70/RSX's triangle count potential. Crytek already shown the way.

ronvalencia

Sorry but I've lost track of what we were talking about, all I remember was something regarding whether or not a single SPE is equivalent to a PPE. Right now I'm more focused on him up there.

[QUOTE="i_am_interested"]

and im having to repeat myself 3 times

"My point was using Cell for graphics robs resources from other areas" - you said that, exactly that

to which you have NO proof of

how can the cell rob resources from other areas when it isnt even maxed out yet?

theres power there to improve both areas

AnnoyedDragon

To answer that I would have to repeat myself again. Ok, last time.

"You will note those posts were talking about resource distribution. There wasn't a need to consider if Cell was maxed or not; because the same rules apply regardless."

Do you see that? Where I said that regardless of whether Cell is fully utilized or not; that my scenario would eventually be the case? Do you see how it was you and not me who brought the idea of it being maxed into argument? You're criticising me for something you said, all I said was my scenario applies either way.

Even if Cell isn't fully utilized, my scenario still applies with what performance they are able to tap from it. Regardless of the utilization; the resulting performance has to be distributed, the more graphics taking the less available for other tasks.

RESOURCE DISTRIBUTION

if a processor is not maxed out, why do they have to take resources from one area in order to give more resources to another area WHEN THEY CAN GIVE MORE RESOURCES TO BOTH?

yeah, it does take away the potential usage, that doesnt mean they have reached a point where they cant improve all facets of games such as uncharted 2 and killzone 2

Cevat Yerli (who you probably think you are) has said that for cryengine 3, physics on ps3 will be the same as on PC - do you want the PS3 to have even better physics than he claims?

youre whole argument is logic based - improving one limits the potential of the other and improving both limits the potential of both

blah blah blah because that doesnt mean they cant improve all aspects of killzone 2 and uncharted 2 with the leftover power

RESOURCE DISTRIBUTION if a processor is not maxed out, why do they have to take resources from one area in order to give more resources to another area WHEN THEY CAN GIVE MORE RESOURCES TO BOTH?

i_am_interested

*headbutts desk*

He's just not listening...

Look, by your own rational. How can they get the resources in order to give more to both if they are unable to fully utilize the hardware?

I am referring to a finite amount of performance, whether that finite amount come from the total performance of the hardware; or simply what they are able to utilize at that time. The performance available has to be distributed between the different tasks the CPU is required to do, the more one task takes; the less available for other tasks.

Do you understand?

youre whole argument is logic based - improving one limits the increased potential of the other and improving both limits the increased potential of both

blah blah blah because that doesnt mean they cant improve all aspects of killzone 2 and uncharted 2 with the leftover power of optimizations

THEY CAN IMPROVE ALL AREAS - to what degree of potential? neither one of us would know because we're not game developers

youre whole argument is pretty much:

i dont know how much they can improve the graphics, but what i do know is that they could improve them a lot more if they didnt have to improve the physics and the AI

and thats exactly it - you dont know how much, and youll never know

This generation is over? I didn't even hear news that the PS4 and next Xbox are coming out. I must be out of the loop...

We can't say that the 360 will never top KZ2 or U2, right now it doesn't but that doesn't mean it will never. Also does having the best graphics really matter? Did it help the Xbox beat the PS2?

youre whole argument is logic based - improving one limits the increased potential of the other and improving both limits the increased potential of both

blah blah blah because that doesnt mean they cant improve all aspects of killzone 2 and uncharted 2 with the leftover power of optimizations

THEY CAN IMPROVE ALL AREAS - to what degree of potential? neither one of us would know because we're not game developers

i_am_interested

Blah blah blah? Will you try to remain civil during this? Plus will you stop focusing on KZ2/U2 when my original comment involved neither of them, I was only responding to someone who brought them up, which must have hurt your fanboy ego with the amount of rage you are expressing over this.

Honestly talking to you power of Cell advocates is a endurance test in reframing from saying anything that would attract moderator attention.

youre whole argument is pretty much:

i dont know how much they can improve the graphics, but what i do know is that they could improve them a lot more if they didnt have to improve the physics and the AI

and thats exactly it - you dont know how much, and youll never know

i_am_interested

Yet clearly you think you do know, even without admitting to it. Whatever it is you believe, you are hyped into thinking it is considerably higher than it is now.

That's what the whole "you're not a dev" argument is about, someone uses the fact that none of us are developers in a effort to negate something someone said that they don't like. But secretly, while using this argument they believe they are right. You're not a developer, therefore my hype influenced performance expectations are right; and you are wrong.

That's what you are really saying here, even if you won't admit it. That argument is rational used to protect your personal views from criticism while attacking someones else's views.

youll never know any of that but all you want to claim is "it could have been more"i_am_interested

Speak for yourself. It doesn't take much of a brain to figure out 100% - 20% = less than 100% being able to be dedicated to any one task, you cannot dedicated 200% to something because you cannot exceed all somethings performance. You on the other hand, you will recognise performance is finite, but I'm sure your imagination flys in regard to what that limit is. You will tell me we don't know its peak capability, which is true, but then you believe it is much higher than anyone thinks.

I'm done here, it was a mistake trying to talk to a power of Cell fanatic.

@ i_am_interested

Note that A4 Games made fun of or berated Sony's GPU documentation. Let's see what some of the top tier NVIDIA's "The Way It's Meant To Be Played" PC programmers can do on the Xbox 360 and PS3.

[QUOTE="AnnoyedDragon"]

[QUOTE="i_am_interested"]

and im having to repeat myself 3 times

"My point was using Cell for graphics robs resources from other areas" - you said that, exactly that

to which you have NO proof of

how can the cell rob resources from other areas when it isnt even maxed out yet?

theres power there to improve both areas

i_am_interested

To answer that I would have to repeat myself again. Ok, last time.

"You will note those posts were talking about resource distribution. There wasn't a need to consider if Cell was maxed or not; because the same rules apply regardless."

Do you see that? Where I said that regardless of whether Cell is fully utilized or not; that my scenario would eventually be the case? Do you see how it was you and not me who brought the idea of it being maxed into argument? You're criticising me for something you said, all I said was my scenario applies either way.

Even if Cell isn't fully utilized, my scenario still applies with what performance they are able to tap from it. Regardless of the utilization; the resulting performance has to be distributed, the more graphics taking the less available for other tasks.

RESOURCE DISTRIBUTION

if a processor is not maxed out, why do they have to take resources from one area in order to give more resources to another area WHEN THEY CAN GIVE MORE RESOURCES TO BOTH?

yeah, it does take away the potential usage, that doesnt mean they have reached a point where they cant improve all facets of games such as uncharted 2 and killzone 2

Cevat Yerli (who you probably think you are) has said that for cryengine 3, physics on ps3 will be the same as on PC - do you want the PS3 to have even better physics than he claims?

youre whole argument is logic based - improving one limits the potential of the other and improving both limits the potential of both

blah blah blah because that doesnt mean they cant improve all aspects of killzone 2 and uncharted 2 with the leftover power

Are you claiming PS3 has same power as NVIDIA Geforce GT285? As stated by Crytek, the PC will remain Crytek's strongest platform.

As for physics, refer to http://http.developer.nvidia.com/GPUGems3/gpugems3_ch16.html

Vegetation in games has always been mainly static, with some sort of simple bending to give the illusion of wind. Our game scenes can have thousands of different vegetations, but still we pushed the envelope further by making vegetation react to global and local wind sources, and we bend not only the vegetation but also the leaves, in detail, with all computations procedurally and efficiently done on the GPU.

I have to ask Sony fanboys: Would you sacrifice the super duper awesome graphics that Killzone has for co op and splitscreen? Or are you really that superficial. Anjunaddict

I have to ask Sony fanboys: Would you sacrifice the super duper awesome graphics that Killzone has for co op and splitscreen? Or are you really that superficial. Anjunaddict

[QUOTE="PAL360"]

[QUOTE="Shewgenja"]

For a console people were claiming was the Waitstation 3, we sure are waiting for the 360 to catch up..

FIipMode

The diference is that PS3 had to wait more than a year to get it´s first great games. Do you think 360 is in the same situation??

[QUOTE="FIipMode"][QUOTE="PAL360"]

The diference is that PS3 had to wait more than a year to get it´s first great games. Do you think 360 is in the same situation??

snyper1982

[QUOTE="FIipMode"][QUOTE="PAL360"]

The diference is that PS3 had to wait more than a year to get it´s first great games. Do you think 360 is in the same situation??

snyper1982

[QUOTE="i_am_interested"]

[QUOTE="AnnoyedDragon"]

To answer that I would have to repeat myself again. Ok, last time.

"You will note those posts were talking about resource distribution. There wasn't a need to consider if Cell was maxed or not; because the same rules apply regardless."

Do you see that? Where I said that regardless of whether Cell is fully utilized or not; that my scenario would eventually be the case? Do you see how it was you and not me who brought the idea of it being maxed into argument? You're criticising me for something you said, all I said was my scenario applies either way.

Even if Cell isn't fully utilized, my scenario still applies with what performance they are able to tap from it. Regardless of the utilization; the resulting performance has to be distributed, the more graphics taking the less available for other tasks.

ronvalencia

RESOURCE DISTRIBUTION

if a processor is not maxed out, why do they have to take resources from one area in order to give more resources to another area WHEN THEY CAN GIVE MORE RESOURCES TO BOTH?

yeah, it does take away the potential usage, that doesnt mean they have reached a point where they cant improve all facets of games such as uncharted 2 and killzone 2

Cevat Yerli (who you probably think you are) has said that for cryengine 3, physics on ps3 will be the same as on PC - do you want the PS3 to have even better physics than he claims?

youre whole argument is logic based - improving one limits the potential of the other and improving both limits the potential of both

blah blah blah because that doesnt mean they cant improve all aspects of killzone 2 and uncharted 2 with the leftover power

Are you claiming PS3 has same power as NVIDIA Geforce GT285? As stated by Crytek, the PC will remain Crytek's strongest platform.

As for physics, refer to http://http.developer.nvidia.com/GPUGems3/gpugems3_ch16.html

Vegetation in games has always been mainly static, with some sort of simple bending to give the illusion of wind. Our game scenes can have thousands of different vegetations, but still we pushed the envelope further by making vegetation react to global and local wind sources, and we bend not only the vegetation but also the leaves, in detail, with all computations procedurally and efficiently done on the GPU.

are you responding to me or someone else? AGAIN - ive never made any claims about graphics cards in this thread

[QUOTE="AnnoyedDragon"]

Blah blah blah? Will you try to remain civil during this? Plus will you stop focusing on KZ2/U2 when my original comment involved neither of them, I was only responding to someone who brought them up, which must have hurt your fanboy ego with the amount of rage you are expressing over this.

Honestly talking to you power of Cell advocates is a endurance test in reframing from saying anything that would attract moderator attention.

[QUOTE="i_am_interested"]

youre whole argument is pretty much:

i dont know how much they can improve the graphics, but what i do know is that they could improve them a lot more if they didnt have to improve the physics and the AI

and thats exactly it - you dont know how much, and youll never know

Yet clearly you think you do know, even without admitting to it. Whatever it is you believe, you are hyped into thinking it is considerably higher than it is now.

That's what the whole "you're not a dev" argument is about, someone uses the fact that none of us are developers in a effort to negate something someone said that they don't like. But secretly, while using this argument they believe they are right. You're not a developer, therefore my hype influenced performance expectations are right; and you are wrong.

That's what you are really saying here, even if you won't admit it. That argument is rational used to protect your personal views from criticism while attacking someones else's views.

youll never know any of that but all you want to claim is "it could have been more"i_am_interested

Speak for yourself. It doesn't take much of a brain to figure out 100% - 20% = less than 100% being able to be dedicated to any one task, you cannot dedicated 200% to something because you cannot exceed all somethings performance. You on the other hand, you will recognise performance is finite, but I'm sure your imagination flys in regard to what that limit is. You will tell me we don't know its peak capability, which is true, but then you believe it is much higher than anyone thinks.

I'm done here, it was a mistake trying to talk to a power of Cell fanatic.

no i dont know how much more can be done, and neither do you

100- 20% = 80% - and? what does that mean in terms of physics code? you tell me, what does that mean in terms of graphics data? you tell me

so according to your logic, how much do these studios such as ND and GG have to decrease their physics code in order to add in another 100 light sources? how many less polygons do they have to cull in order to add in 5 more non playable characters? you dont know any of that stuff about whats going on

in terms of resources Cervat Yerli (who you probably think you are) has gone on record to say that the PS3's physics implementation of Cryengine3 will be on par with the PCs, do you want them to sacrifice graphics in order to IMPROVE that physics implementation? is that even possible for them to outdo the PC version's of Cryengine 3's implementation of physics if they tradeoff say "20%" of graphics?

can crytek do that? what the hell am i asking you for, you dont know

@ i_am_interested

Note that A4 Games made fun of or berated Sony's GPU documentation. Let's see what some of the top tier NVIDIA's "The Way It's Meant To Be Played" PC programmers can do on the Xbox 360 and PS3.

ronvalencia

yeah they did poke fun at it which means theres a good chance that they can get more out of it than the documents claim if they can implement a way to counter those lost cycles

but that documentation is most likely from 2005, maybe even earlier

thats not to say that other companies such as ND, GG, or SSM havent poked fun at it either and already gone past what the documents claim

we'll never know, they even went on to say that Guerilla's game code appeared poorly optimzed which is another indication of them being able to get more out the PS3

as for guerilla, theyre well aware of how much optimization they can still do

[QUOTE="i_am_interested"][QUOTE="SilentlyMad"]When will a PS3 exclusive have better models then Fight Night. Since you only mention very linear and scripted games I just assume game size does not matter.SilentlyMad

MGS4 models say Hi.

I won't even mention Heavy Rain.

The fact remains that PS3 exclusives from 2008 can't be matched by anything on Xbox 360. Once Last Guardian, GT5 and God of War III arrive it will be final nail to the discussion.

[QUOTE=""]

[QUOTE="AnnoyedDragon"]

That doesn't change that a SPE is different from a PPE, being optimized for a different range of performance and tasks. Sure like you said a creative programmer can work around it to achieve the same result, but they are far too different to be able to say SPE = PPE performance.

[QUOTE="i_am_interested"]resource distribution? thats all your argument is now? why do they have to distribute resources to one facet such as graphics OVER another resource such as AI when they can devote resources to both? that is unless you think the processor is maxed outi_am_interested

Does anyone else notice I am having to repeat myself to this guy over and over again? I've said it too many times already, go read the others.

and im having to repeat myself 3 times

"My point was using Cell for graphics robs resources from other areas" - you said that, exactly that

to which you have NO proof of

how can the cell rob resources from other areas when it isnt even maxed out yet?

theres power there to improve both areas

[QUOTE="i_am_interested"]

[QUOTE=""]

Does anyone else notice I am having to repeat myself to this guy over and over again? I've said it too many times already, go read the others.

snyper1982

and im having to repeat myself 3 times

"My point was using Cell for graphics robs resources from other areas" - you said that, exactly that

to which you have NO proof of

how can the cell rob resources from other areas when it isnt even maxed out yet?

theres power there to improve both areas

Cell won't be maxed out for another 3-4 years. The time and games on PS3 will will be the proof of that.

[QUOTE="i_am_interested"]

[QUOTE=""]

Does anyone else notice I am having to repeat myself to this guy over and over again? I've said it too many times already, go read the others.

snyper1982

and im having to repeat myself 3 times

"My point was using Cell for graphics robs resources from other areas" - you said that, exactly that

to which you have NO proof of

how can the cell rob resources from other areas when it isnt even maxed out yet?

theres power there to improve both areas

yeah, we left that discussion a while ago so unless youve got some kind of NEW evidence from game developers that says theyre both maxed out already, lets just move on

well eventually the 360 might have a game that looks better than UC2 and KZ2, but by that time UC3 and KZ3 will be out so the graphics will look even better than they are now.

[QUOTE="snyper1982"][QUOTE="FIipMode"] So R1 and Motorstorm wasn't great? They were to me, your probably just going by review scores.FIipMode

[QUOTE="SilentlyMad"]

[QUOTE="i_am_interested"] i dont know if its the dumbest so ill just say its one of the dumbest comparisons ive ever readSokol4ever

MGS4 models say Hi.

I won't even mention Heavy Rain.

The fact remains that PS3 exclusives from 2008 can't be matched by anything on Xbox 360. Once Last Guardian, GT5 and God of War III arrive it will be final nail to the discussion.

[QUOTE="snyper1982"][QUOTE="i_am_interested"]

and im having to repeat myself 3 times

"My point was using Cell for graphics robs resources from other areas" - you said that, exactly that

to which you have NO proof of

how can the cell rob resources from other areas when it isnt even maxed out yet?

theres power there to improve both areas

Sokol4ever

Cell won't be maxed out for another 3-4 years. The time and games on PS3 will will be the proof of that.

[QUOTE="snyper1982"][QUOTE="i_am_interested"]

and im having to repeat myself 3 times

"My point was using Cell for graphics robs resources from other areas" - you said that, exactly that

to which you have NO proof of

how can the cell rob resources from other areas when it isnt even maxed out yet?

theres power there to improve both areas

i_am_interested

yeah, we left that discussion a while ago so unless youve got some kind of NEW evidence from game developers that says theyre both maxed out already, lets just move on

[QUOTE="i_am_interested"]

[QUOTE="snyper1982"] That is easy, because it is maxed out. Both systems are nearly always maxed out. It comes down to programming efficiency. snyper1982

yeah, we left that discussion a while ago so unless youve got some kind of NEW evidence from game developers that says theyre both maxed out already, lets just move on

how many games out there are we aware of that actually utilize the SPUs 100% of the time and never let them go idle? one?

[QUOTE="snyper1982"][QUOTE="i_am_interested"]

yeah, we left that discussion a while ago so unless youve got some kind of NEW evidence from game developers that says theyre both maxed out already, lets just move on

i_am_interested

how many games out there are we aware of that actually utilize the SPUs 100% of the time and never let them go idle? one?

[QUOTE="i_am_interested"]

[QUOTE="snyper1982"] If the processor is being 100% utilized it is maxed out. There is no getting around that. That is where programming efficiency comes in, as that is the only way we will see any improvements. We aren't going to see games looking a lot better than what is out right now, as regardless of how much power the cell has, the memory and gpu are the weakest links. Like I said before, they are so close graphically it comes down down to your personal preference as to which one looks "better". There really is no correct ansewer, as what looks better, is just as subjective as what game is a "better" game, or what is the "best" movie, or "best" book, etc.snyper1982

how many games out there are we aware of that actually utilize the SPUs 100% of the time and never let them go idle? one?

[QUOTE="snyper1982"][QUOTE="i_am_interested"]

and im having to repeat myself 3 times

"My point was using Cell for graphics robs resources from other areas" - you said that, exactly that

to which you have NO proof of

how can the cell rob resources from other areas when it isnt even maxed out yet?

theres power there to improve both areas

yeah, we left that discussion a while ago so unless youve got some kind of NEW evidence from game developers that says theyre both maxed out already, lets just move on